As global shippers demand greater predictability in ocean freight schedules, Gemini Cooperation — the alliance between Maersk and Hapag-Lloyd — has come under focus for its claims of high schedule reliability. According to Sea-Intelligence, the alliance has achieved reliability rates exceeding 90%, even touching 93.2%, making it one of the most reliable services in the industry.

However, competing evaluations by eeSea, another maritime intelligence provider, report lower reliability figures ranging from 80% to 90%, depending on trade lanes. These differences reveal a deeper issue: methodological discrepancies in how schedule reliability is defined and calculated.

Key Data Summary

Aspect	Details
Claimed Reliability by Sea-Intelligence	93.2% (Gemini’s highest since Feb 2025)
Claimed Reliability by eeSea	Between 80% and 90% (varies by trade lane)
Discrepancy Reason	Differing definitions of “on time,” and variations in schedule measurement
Sea-Intelligence Methodology	Ignores first 14 days of a new schedule; focuses on actual arrivals
eeSea Methodology	Tracks against original proforma schedules; considers all changes
Schedule Adjustment Window	Changes may occur up to 60 days before sailing
Operational Features of Gemini	Fewer port calls improve predictability; use of feeders adds complexity
Expert Perspectives	Both Alan Murphy (Sea-Intelligence) and Simon Sundboell (eeSea) validate each other’s methodology
Alliance Start Date	February 2025

Dissecting the Discrepancy

The difference between Sea-Intelligence’s 93.2% and eeSea’s ~80% stems largely from how reliability is measured:

• Sea-Intelligence filters out early-stage changes and focuses on actual performance post-schedule stabilization.
• eeSea measures against the original proforma schedules, incorporating every change — even those made months before sailing.

This leads to diverging figures, both of which are technically accurate, but tell different stories about what “reliability” really means in shipping.

Impact of Gemini’s Operational Design

The Gemini alliance benefits from reduced port calls, which logically increases schedule predictability. However, this advantage is counterbalanced by the reliance on shuttle and feeder services, which can introduce more variability and obscure end-to-end reliability.

Additionally, schedule locking practices — which allow for adjustments up to 60 days before vessel departure — play a crucial role in how each intelligence firm tracks deviations and determines final reliability scores.

Conclusion: Reliability Depends on the Lens

While Maersk and Hapag-Lloyd tout high reliability figures, the debate between Sea-Intelligence and eeSea illustrates that reliability is not a one-size-fits-all metric. Instead, it depends on who’s measuring it — and how.

For shippers, transparency in methodology is just as important as the numbers themselves. As alliances like Gemini reshape global maritime logistics, clarity around performance metrics will be key to building trust and making informed decisions.